psychologywikiaorg-20200213-history
Computer assisted design
Computer assisted design or Computer-Aided Drawing (CAD) is the use of computer technology to aid in the design of a product. Current software packages range from 2D vector base drafting systems to 3D solid and surface modellers. Origins and terminology CAD originally meant Computer-Aided Drafting or designing because of its original use as a replacement for traditional drafting. Now, CAD usually means Computer Aided Design to reflect the fact that modern CAD tools do more than just drafting. CAD is sometimes translated as "computer-assisted", "computer-aided drafting", or a similar phrase. Related acronyms are CADD, which stands for "computer-aided design and drafting", CAID for computer-aided industrial design and CAAD, for "computer-aided architectural design". All of these terms are essentially synonymous, but there are a few subtle differences in meaning and application. CAM (Computer-aided manufacturing) is also often used in a similar way, or as a combination (CAD/CAM). The term CAD is generally used for graphical design, whereas non-graphical computer-aided design, though there may be a focus on shape and shape-related functions, is usually called Knowledge-based engineering (KBE). Introduction .]] CAD is used to design, develop and optimize products, which can be goods used by end consumers or intermediate goods used in other products. CAD is also extensively used in the design of tools and machinery used in the manufacture of components, and in the drafting and design of all types of buildings, from small residential types (houses) to the largest commercial and industrial structures (hospitals and factories). CAD is mainly used for detailed engineering of 3D models and/or 2D drawings of physical components, but it is also used throughout the engineering process from conceptual design and layout of products, through strength and dynamic analysis of assemblies to definition of manufacturing methods of components. CAD has become an especially important technology, within the scope of Computer Aided technologies, with benefits such as lower product development costs and a greatly shortened design cycle. CAD enables designers to lay out and develop work on screen, print it out and save it for future editing, saving time on their drawings. Fields of use *The Architecture, Engineering, and Construction (AEC) Industry ** Architecture ** Architectural engineering ** Interior Design ** Interior Architecture ** Building engineering ** Civil Engineering and Infrastructure ** Construction ** Roads and Highways ** Railroads and Tunnels ** Water Supply and Hydraulic Engineering ** Storm Drain, Wastewater and Sewer systems ** Mapping and Surveying ** (Chemical) Plant Design ** Factory Layout ** Heating, Ventilation and air-conditioning (HVAC) * Mechanical (MCAD) Engineering ** Automotive - vehicles ** Aerospace ** Consumer Goods ** Machinery ** Shipbuilding ** Bio-mechanical systems *Electronic design automation (EDA) ** Electronic and Electrical (ECAD) ** Digital circuit design *Electrical Engineering ** Power Engineering or Power Systems Engineering ** Power Systems CAD ** Power analytics * Manufacturing process planning *Industrial Design * Software applications *Apparel and Textile CAD ** designing musical instruments **Fashion Design *Garden design *Lighting Design *Medicine History Designers have long used computers for their calculations. Initial developments were carried out in the 1960s within the aircraft and automotive industries in the area of 3D surface construction and NC programming, most of it independent of one another and often not publicly published until much later. Some of the mathematical description work on curves was developed in the early 1940s by Isaac Jacob Schoenberg, Apalatequi (Douglas Aircraft) and Roy Liming (North American Aircraft). Robert A. Heinlein in his 1957 novel The Door into Summer suggested the possibility of a robotic Drafting Dan. However, probably the most important work on polynomial curves and sculptured surface was done by Pierre Bezier (Renault), Paul de Casteljau (Citroen), Steven Anson Coons (MIT, Ford), James Ferguson (Boeing), Carl de Boor (GM), Birkhoff (GM) and Garibedian (GM) in the 1960s and W. Gordon (GM) and R. Riesenfeld in the 1970s. It is argued that a turning point was the development of the SKETCHPAD system at MIT in 1963 by Ivan Sutherland (who later created a graphics technology company with Dr. David Evans). The distinctive feature of SKETCHPAD was that it allowed the designer to interact with his computer graphically: the design can be fed into the computer by drawing on a CRT monitor with a light pen. Effectively, it was a prototype of graphical user interface, an indispensable feature of modern CAD. First commercial applications of CAD were in large companies in the automotive and aerospace industries, as well as in electronics. Only large corporations could afford the computers capable of performing the calculations. Notable company projects were at GM (Dr. Patrick J.Hanratty) with DAC-1 (Design Augmented by Computer) 1964; Lockheed projects; Bell GRAPHIC 1 and at Renault (Bezier) – UNISURF 1971 car body design and tooling. One of the most influential events in the development of CAD was the founding of MCS (Manufacturing and Consulting Services Inc.) in 1971 by Dr. P. J. Hanratty , who wrote the system ADAM (Automated Drafting And Machining) but more importantly supplied code to companies such as McDonnell Douglas (Unigraphics), Computervision (CADDS), Calma, Gerber, Autotrol and Control Data. As computers became more affordable, the application areas have gradually expanded. The development of CAD software for personal desk-top computers was the impetus for almost universal application in all areas of construction. Other key points in the 1960s and 1970s would be the foundation of CAD systems United Computing, Intergraph, IBM, Intergraph IGDS in 1974 (which led to Bentley MicroStation in 1984) CAD implementations have evolved dramatically since then. Initially, with 2D in the 1970s, it was typically limited to producing drawings similar to hand-drafted drawings. Advances in programming and computer hardware, notably solid modeling in the 1980s, have allowed more versatile applications of computers in design activities. Key products for 1981 were the solid modelling packages -Romulus (ShapeData) and Uni-Solid (Unigraphics) based on PADL-2 and the release of the surface modeler CATIA (Dassault Systemes). Autodesk was founded 1982 by John Walker, which led to the 2D system AutoCAD. The next milestone was the release of Pro/ENGINEER in 1988, which heralded greater usage of feature-based modeling methods and parametric linking of the parameters of features. Also of importance to the development of CAD was the development of the B-rep solid modeling kernels (engines for manipulating geometrically and topologically consistent 3D objects) Parasolid (ShapeData) and ACIS (Spatial Technology Inc.) at the end of the 1980s and beginning of the 1990s, both inspired by the work of Ian Braid. This led to the release of mid-range packages such as SolidWorks in 1995, SolidEdge (Intergraph) in 1996, and IronCAD in 1998. Today CAD is one of the main tools used in designing products and architects. Software providers today Main articles: List of CAD companies and list of free and open-source CAD software. Capabilities The capabilities of modern CAD systems include: *Wireframe geometry creation *3D parametric feature based modelling, Solid modelling * Freeform surface modelling * Automated design of assemblies, which are collections of parts and/or other assemblies * create Engineering drawings from the solid models * Reuse of design components * Ease of modification of design of model and the production of multiple versions * Automatic generation of standard components of the design * Validation/verification of designs against specifications and design rules * Simulation of designs without building a physical prototype * Output of engineering documentation, such as manufacturing drawings, and Bills of Materials to reflect the BOM required to build the product * Import/Export routines to exchange data with other software packages * Output of design data directly to manufacturing facilities * Output directly to a Rapid Prototyping or Rapid Manufacture Machine for industrial prototypes * maintain libraries of parts and assemblies * calculate mass properties of parts and assemblies * aid visualization with shading, rotating, hidden line removal, etc. * Bi-directional parametric association (modification of any feature is reflected in all information relying on that feature; drawings, mass properties, assemblies, etc.) * kinematics, interference and clearance checking of assemblies * sheet metal * hose/cable routing * electrical component packaging * inclusion of programming code in a model to control and relate desired attributes of the model * Programmable design studies and optimization * Sophisticated visual analysis routines, for draft, curvature, curvature continuity.''' Software technologies Originally software for CAD systems were developed with computer language such as Fortran, but with the advancement of object-oriented programming methods this has radically changed. Typical modern parametric feature based modeler and freeform surface systems are built around a number of key C programming language modules with their own APIs. A CAD system can be seen as built up from the interaction of a graphical user interface (GUI) with NURBS geometry and/or boundary representation (B-rep) data via a geometric modeling kernel. A geometry constraint engine may also be employed to manage the associative relationships between geometry, such as wireframe geometry in a sketch or components in an assembly. Advanced capabilities of these associative relationships have led to a new form of prototyping called digital prototyping. In contrast to physical prototypes, which entail manufacturing time and material costs, digital prototypes allow for design verification and testing on screen, speeding time-to-market and decreasing costs. As technology evolves in this way, CAD has moved beyond a documentation tool (representing designs in graphical format) into a more robust designing tool that assists in the design process. Hardware and OS technologies Today most CAD computer workstations are Windows based PCs. Some CAD systems also run on one of the the Unix operating systems and a few with Linux. Some CAD systems such as QCad or NX provide multiplatform support including Windows, Linux, UNIX and Mac OSX. Generally no special hardware is required with the exception of a high end OpenGL based Graphics card. However for complex product design, machines with high speed (and possibly multiple) CPUs and large amounts of RAM are recommended. CAD was an application that benefitted from the installation of a numeric coprocessor especially in early personal computers. The human-machine interface is generally via a computer mouse but can also be via a pen and digitizing graphics tablet. Manipulation of the view of the model on the screen is also sometimes done with the use of a spacemouse/SpaceBall. Some systems also support stereoscopic glasses for viewing the 3D model. Using CAD CAD is one of the many tools used by engineers and designers and is used in many ways depending on the profession of the user and the type of software in question. Each of the different types of CAD systems requires the operator to think differently about how he or she will use them and he or she must design their virtual components in a different manner for each. There are many producers of the lower-end 2D systems, including a number of free and open source programs. These provide an approach to the drawing process without all the fuss over scale and placement on the drawing sheet that accompanied hand drafting, since these can be adjusted as required during the creation of the final draft. 3D wireframe is basically an extension of 2D drafting. Each line has to be manually inserted into the drawing. The final product has no mass properties associated with it and cannot have features directly added to it, such as holes. The operator approaches these in a similar fashion to the 2D systems, although many 3D systems allow using the wireframe model to make the final engineering drawing views. 3D "dumb" solids (programs incorporating this technology include AutoCAD and Cadkey 19) are created in a way analogous to manipulations of real word objects. Basic three-dimensional geometric forms (prisms, cylinders, spheres, and so on) have solid volumes added or subtracted from them, as if assembling or cutting real-world objects. Two-dimensional projected views can easily be generated from the models. Basic 3D solids don't usually include tools to easily allow motion of components, set limits to their motion, or identify interference between components. 3D parametric solid modeling (programs incorporating this technology include Alibre Design, TopSolid, SolidWorks, and Solid Edge) require the operator to use what is referred to as "design intent". The objects and features created are adjustable. Any future modifications will be simple, difficult, or nearly impossible, depending on how the original part was created. One must think of this as being a "perfect world" representation of the component. If a feature was intended to be located from the center of the part, the operator needs to locate it from the center of the model, not, perhaps, from a more convenient edge or an arbitrary point, as he could when using "dumb" solids. Parametric solids require the operator to consider the consequences of his actions carefully. What may be simplest today could be worst case tomorrow. Some software packages provide the ability to edit parametric and non-parametric geometry without the need to understand or undo the design intent history of the geometry by use of direct modeling functionality. This ability may also include the additional ability to infer the correct relationships between selected geometry (e.g., tangency, concentricity) which makes the editing process less time and labor intensive while still freeing the engineer from the burden of understanding the model’s design intent history. Draft views are able to be generated easily from the models. Assemblies usually incorporate tools to represent the motions of components, set their limits, and identify interference. The tool kits available for these systems are ever increasing, including 3D piping and injection mold designing packages. Mid range software was integrating parametric solids more easily to the end user: integrating more intuitive functions (SketchUp), going to the best of both worlds with 3D dumb solids with parametric characteristics (VectorWorks) or making very real-view scenes in relative few steps (Cinema4D). Top end systems offer the capabilities to incorporate more organic, aesthetics and ergonomic features into designs. Freeform surface modelling is often combined with solids to allow the designer to create products that fit the human form and visual requirements as well as they interface with the machine. His or her ultimate goal should be to make future work on the current project as simple as possible. This requires a solid understanding of the system being used. A little extra time spent now could mean a great savings later. The Effects of CAD Starting in the late 1980s, the development of readily affordable CAD programs that could be run on personal computers began a trend of massive downsizing in drafting departments in many small to mid-size companies. As a general rule, one CAD operator could readily replace at least three or five drafters using traditional methods. Additionally, many engineers began to do their own drafting work, further eliminating the need for traditional drafting departments. This trend mirrored that of the elimination of many office jobs traditionally performed by a secretary as word processors, spreadsheets, databases, etc. became standard software packages that "everyone" was expected to learn. Another consequence had been that since the latest advances were often quite expensive, small and even mid-size firms often could not compete against large firms who could use their computational edge for competitive purposes. Today, however, hardware and software costs have come down. Even high-end packages work on less expensive platforms and some even support multiple platforms. The costs associated with CAD implementation now are more heavily weighted to the costs of training in the use of these high level tools, the cost of integrating a CAD/CAM/CAE PLM using enterprise across multi-CAD and multi-platform environments and the costs of modifying design workflows to exploit the full advantage of CAD tools. CAD vendors have been effective in providing tools to lower these training costs. These tools have operated in three CAD arenas: # Improved and simplified user interfaces. This includes the availability of “role” specific tailorable user interfaces through which commands are presented to users in a form appropriate to their function and expertise. # Enhancements to application software. One such example is improved design-in-context, through the ability to model/edit a design component from within the context of a large, even multi-CAD, active digital mockup. # User oriented modeling options. This includes the ability to free the user from the need to understand the design intent history of a complex intelligent model. The adoption of CAD studio or "paper-less studio," as it is sometimes called, in architectural schools was not without resistance, however. Teachers were worried that sketching on a computer screen did not replicate the skills associated with age-old practice of sketching in a sketchbook. Furthermore, many teachers were worried that students would be hired for their computer skills rather than their design skill, as was indeed common in the 1990s. Today, however, (for better or worse, depending on the authority cited) education in CAD is now accepted across the board in schools of architecture. It should be noted, however, that not all architects have wanted to join the CAD revolution. See also *Architecture *Computer simulation *Environmental planning *Human factors engineering *Human machine systems design *Product design References *Aboulafia, A., & Bannon, L. J. (2004). Understanding affect in design: An outline conceptual framework: Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science Vol 5(1) Jan-Feb 2004, 4-15. *Adell, E., & Varhelyi, A. (2008). Driver comprehension and acceptance of the active accelerator pedal after long-term use: Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour Vol 11(1) Jan 2008, 37-51. *Adiloglu, K., & Alpaslan, F. N. (2007). A machine learning approach to two-voice counterpoint composition: Knowledge-Based Systems Vol 20(3) Apr 2007, 300-309. *Akoumianakis, D., & Stephanidis, C. (2005). Building Consensus in Human-Computer Interaction Design: Integrated Activity-Oriented Design Environments: International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction Vol 18(1) 2005, 85-103. *Anderson, T., Sanford, A., Thomson, A., & Ion, W. (2007). Computer-supported and face-to-face collaboration on design tasks: Discourse Processes Vol 43(3) 2007, 201-228. *Bean, D. L. (1998). Job satisfaction among United States textile and apparel designers who use computer-aided design. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering. *Benami, O. (2003). A cognitive approach to creative conceptual design. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering. *Bengtsson, P., & Johansson, C. R. (2002). Significance of the dimensional view for visualizing relevant aspects of a production system in a co-operative planning process: Ergonomics Vol 45(13) Oct 2002, 910-921. *Bengtsson, P., Johansson, C. R., & Akselsson, K. R. (1997). Planning working environment and production by using paper drawings and computer animation: Ergonomics Vol 40(3) Mar 1997, 334-347. *Benyon, D. (2006). Navigating information space: Web site design and lessons from the built environment: PsychNology Journal Vol 4(1) 2006, 7-24. *Bethlehem, J. (1999). The routing structure of questionnaires: International Journal of Market Research Vol 42(1) Win 1999-2000, 95-110. *Beynon, M. (2005). Radical Empiricism, Empirical Modelling and the nature of knowing: Pragmatics & Cognition Vol 13(3) 2005, 615-646. *Biggers, K. E., & Ioerger, T. R. (2001). Automatic generation of communication and teamwork within multi-agent teams: Applied Artificial Intelligence Vol 15(10) Nov 2001, 875-916. *Blandford, A., & Rugg, G. (2002). A case study on integrating contextual information with analytical usability evaluation: International Journal of Human-Computer Studies Vol 57(1) Jul 2002, 75-99. *Blauvelt, G. R. (2006). Machineshop: A design environment for supporting children's construction of mechanical reasoning and spatial cognition. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering. *Bonnardel, N. (2000). Towards understanding and supporting creativity in design: Analogies in a constrained cognitive environment: Knowledge-Based Systems Vol 13(7-8) Dec 2000, 505-513. *Borner, K. (2001). Efficient case-based structure generation for design support: Artificial Intelligence Review Vol 16(2) Oct 2001, 87-118. *Borthick, A. F. (2001). Designing learning experiences for enabling collaborative discovery learning online. Jacksonville, FL: Florida Community College at Jacksonville. *Bose, I., Altinkemer, K., & Chaturvedi, A. (2003). Tradeoff decisions in the design of a backbone computer network using visualization: Decision Support Systems Vol 35(3) Jun 2003, 335-351. *Bravo, C., Redondo, M. A., Ortega, M., & Verdejo, M. F. (2006). Collaborative environments for the learning of design: A model and a case study in Domotics: Computers & Education Vol 46(2) Feb 2006, 152-173. *Brazier, F. M. T., van Langen, P. H. G., & Treur, J. (1998). Strategic knowledge in design: A compositional approach: Knowledge-Based Systems Vol 11(7-8) Dec 1998, 405-416. *Bridgeman, B., Bejar, I. I., & Friedman, D. (1999). Fairness issues in a computer-based architectural licensure examination: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 15(3-4) May-Jul 1999, 419-440. *Bubb, H. (2002). Computer aided tools of ergonomics and system design: Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing Vol 12(3) Sum 2002, 249-265. *Campbell, J. D. (2004). Interaction in collaborative computer supported diagram development: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 20(2) Mar 2004, 289-310. *Campbell, M. I. (2001). The A-Design invention machine: A means of automating and investigating conceptual design. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering. *Candy, L. (1997). Computers and creativity support: Knowledge, visualisation and collaboration: Knowledge-Based Systems Vol 10(1) Jun 1997, 3-13. *Carr-Chellman, A. A., & Savoy, M. R. (2003). Using the user-design research for building school communities: School Community Journal Vol 13(2) Fal-Win 2003, 99-118. *Carroll, J. M. (2001). Scenario-based design: A brief history and rationale. Oxford, England: Elsevier Science Ltd. *Cegarra, J., & Hoc, J.-M. (2006). Cognitive styles as an explanation of experts' individual differences: A case study in computer-assisted troubleshooting diagnosis: International Journal of Human-Computer Studies Vol 64(2) Feb 2006, 123-136. *Chaffin, D. B., Faraway, J. J., Zhang, X., & Woolley, C. (2000). Stature, age, and gender effects on reach motion postures: Human Factors Vol 42(3) Fal 2000, 408-420. *Chang, C.-C. (2006). Development of competency-based web learning material and effect evaluation of self-directed learning aptitudes on learning achievements: Interactive Learning Environments Vol 14(3) Dec 2006, 265-286. *Chang, S. (1999). Image is more important than experience: A case study of hi-tech home building in response to shifting home identities. Edmond, OK: Environmental Design Research Association. *Chen, W., Pedersen, R. H., & Pettersen, O. (2006). CoLeMo: A collaborative learning environment for UML modelling: Interactive Learning Environments Vol 14(3) Dec 2006, 233-249. *Chevalier, A., & Bonnardel, N. (2007). Articulation of web site design constraints: Effects of the task and designers' expertise: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 23(5) Sep 2007, 2455-2472. *Conole, G. (2004). Editorial: ALT-J Research in Learning Technology Vol 12(3) Sep 2004, 203-204. *d'Aquin, M., Bouthier, C., Brachais, S., Lieber, J., & Napoli, A. (2005). Knowledge editing and maintenance tools for a semantic portal in oncology: International Journal of Human-Computer Studies Vol 62(5) May 2005, 619-638. *Davison, R. (2000). The role of groupware in requirements specification: Group Decision and Negotiation Vol 9(2) Mar 2000, 149-160. *Day, D. L. (1996). User responses to constraints in computerized design tools. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences. *de Silva Garza, A. G., & Maher, M. L. (1996). Design by interactive exploration using memory-based techniques: Knowledge-Based Systems Vol 9(3) May 1996, 151-161. *de Souza, C. S. (2005). Semiotic engineering: Bringing designers and users together at interaction time: Interacting with Computers Vol 17(3) May 2005, 317-341. *de Vries, E., & de Jong, T. (1997). Using information systems while performing complex tasks: An example from architectural design: International Journal of Human-Computer Studies Vol 46(1) Jan 1997, 31-54. *Dean, D. L., Orwig, R. E., & Vogel, D. R. (2000). Facilitation methods for collaborative modeling tools: Group Decision and Negotiation Vol 9(2) Mar 2000, 109-127. *Deb, S. K., & Bhattacharyya, B. (2005). Fuzzy decision support system for manufacturing facilities layout planning: Decision Support Systems Vol 40(2) Aug 2005, 305-314. *Do, E. Y.-L. (1999). The right tool at the right time: Investigation of freehand drawing as an interface to knowledge-based design tools. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences. *Do, E. Y.-L. (2005). Design sketches and sketch design tools: Knowledge-Based Systems Vol 18(8) Dec 2005, 383-405. *Duffy, V. G. (2007). Modified virtual build methodology for computer-aided ergonomics and safety: Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing Vol 17(5) Sep-Oct 2007, 413-422. *Dwyer, N. (2007). Incorporating indexicality and contingency into the design of representations for computer-mediated collaboration. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering. *Eack, S. M., & Singer, J. B. (2005). Further Considerations About SQL Clinic: Psychiatric Services Vol 56(8) Aug 2005, 1023-1024. *Edelson, D. C. (2002). Design research: What we learn when we engage in design: Journal of the Learning Sciences Vol 11(1) Jan 2002, 105-121. *Eisenberg, M. (2002). Output devices, computation, and the future of mathematical crafts: International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning Vol 7(1) Apr 2002, 1-44. *Elias, M. J., Hoover, H. V. A., & Poedubicky, V. (1997). Computer-facilitated counseling for at-risk students in a social problem solving "lab." Elementary School Guidance & Counseling Vol 31(4) Apr 1997, 293-309. *Englisch, U., & Sachse, P. (2006). Comparing actions of creative designing: Journal fur Psychologie Vol 14(3-4) 2006, 331-347. *Erickson, T. (2000). Supporting interdisciplinary design: Towards pattern languages for workplaces. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. *Fang, X. (2000). A hierarchical search history for Web searching: International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction Vol 12(1) 2000, 73-88. *Fentem, A. C., Dumas, A., & McDonnell, J. (1998). Evolving spatial representations to support innovation and the communication of strategic knowledge: Knowledge-Based Systems Vol 11(7-8) Dec 1998, 417-428. *Feria, C. S., Braunstein, M. L., & Andersen, G. J. (2003). Judging distance across texture discontinuities: Perception Vol 32(12) 2003, 1423-1440. *Ferraro, A. (1998). An examination of the collaborative design process using multiple media resources and sharing protocols. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering. *Feyen, R., Liu, Y., Chaffin, D., Jimmerson, G., & Joseph, B. (2000). Computer-aided ergonomics: A case study of incorporating ergonomics analyses into workplace design: Applied Ergonomics Vol 31(3) Jun 2000, 291-300. *Fischer, G., & Nakakoji, K. (1997). Computational environments supporting creativity in the context of lifelong learning and design: Knowledge-Based Systems Vol 10(1) Jun 1997, 21-28. *Fowkes, K. M., & McWhirter, E. H. (2007). Evaluation of computer-assisted career guidance in middle and secondary education settings: status, obstacles, and suggestions: Journal of Career Assessment Vol 15(3) Aug 2007, 388-400. *Frankel, K. R. (2005). A multiple case study of referral of clients to therapists using an evidence-based computerized matching system. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering. *Freudenmann, R. W., & Spitzer, M. (2001). Computer assisted questioning as a basis for a modern quality assurance in psychiatry. Results from pilot studies: Nervenarzt Vol 72(1) 2001, 40-51. *Frowd, C. D., Hancock, P. J. B., & Carson, D. (2004). EvoFIT: A holistic, evolutionary facial imaging technique for creating composites: ACM Transactions on Applied Perception Vol 1(1) Jul 2004, 19-39. *Fry, J. M., & Hin, M. K. T. (2006). Peer coaching with interactive wireless technology between student teachers: Satisfaction with role and communication: Interactive Learning Environments Vol 14(3) Dec 2006, 193-204. *Fu, L., & Salvendy, G. (2002). The contribution of apparent and inherent usability to a user's satisfaction in a searching and browsing task on the web: Ergonomics Vol 45(6) May 2002, 415-424. *Garcia, R. R., Quiros, J. S., Santos, R. G., & Alvarez Penin, P. I. (2007). Teaching CAD at the university: Specifically written or commercial software? : Computers & Education Vol 49(3) Nov 2007, 763-780. *Gawron, V. J., Dennison, T. W., & Biferno, M. A. (2002). Mock-ups, models, simulations, and embedded testing. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers. *Gerhard, M., Moore, D., & Hobbs, D. (2004). Embodiment and copresence in collaborative interfaces: International Journal of Human-Computer Studies Vol 61(4) Oct 2004, 453-480. *Girardi, R., Marinho, L. B., & de Oliveira, I. R. (2005). A system of agent-based software patterns for user modeling based on usage mining: Interacting with Computers Vol 17(5) Sep 2005, 567-591. *Good, T., & DiTommaso, M. (2005). In Reply: Psychiatric Services Vol 56(8) Aug 2005, 1024. *Good, T., DiTommaso, M., Freedman, J., & Rosenthal, R. N. (2005). SQL Clinic: The Open-Source Alternative for Electronic Medical Records: Psychiatric Services Vol 56(3) Mar 2005, 269-271. *Goodman, J., Dong, H., Langdon, P., & Clarkson, P. J. (2006). Increasing the uptake of Inclusive Design in industry: Gerontechnology Vol 5(3) Sep 2006, 140-149. *Graff, M. (2005). Differences in Concept Mapping, Hypertext Architecture, and the Analyst-Intuition Dimension of Cognitive Style: Educational Psychology Vol 25(4) Aug 2005, 409-422. *Gulliksen, J., & Lantz, A. (2003). Design versus design: From the shaping of products to the creation of user experiences: International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction Vol 15(1) 2003, 5-20. *Gyi, D. E., Sims, R. E., Porter, J. M., Marshall, R., & Case, K. (2004). Representing older and disabled people in virtual user trials: Data collection methods: Applied Ergonomics Vol 35(5) Sep 2004, 443-451. *Halskov, K., & Nielsen, R. (2006). Virtual Video Prototyping: Human-Computer Interaction Vol 21(2) 2006, 199-233. *Hamade, R. F., Artail, H. A., & Jaber, M. Y. (2005). Learning theory as applied to mechanical CAD training of novices: International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction Vol 19(3) 2005, 305-322. *Hamade, R. F., Artail, H. A., & Jaber, M. Y. (2007). Evaluating the learning process of mechanical CAD students: Computers & Education Vol 49(3) Nov 2007, 640-661. *Hansen, D. (1970). A Full Menu: PsycCRITIQUES Vol 15 (11), Nov, 1970. *Hartmann, C., & Calandra, B. (2007). Diffusion and reinvention of ePortfolio design practices as a catalyst for teacher learning: Technology, Pedagogy and Education Vol 16(1) Mar 2007, 77-93. *Haue, J.-B. (2004). Integrating situated aspects of activity in a cognitive engineering approach centered on situation of use: Activites Vol 1(2) 2004, 170-194. *Hewer, S. (2006). Inspiring inclusion--How RSA Design Directions encourage students to create universally accessible products: Gerontechnology Vol 5(3) Sep 2006, 174-176. *Higginbotham, D. J., Kim, K.-E., & Scally, C. (2007). The effect of the communication output method on augmented interaction: AAC: Augmentative and Alternative Communication Vol 23(2) Jun 2007, 140-153. *Hoeben, A., & Stappers, P. J. (2005). Direct talkback in computer supported tools for the conceptual stage of design: Knowledge-Based Systems Vol 18(8) Dec 2005, 407-413. *Hoffmann, H., Stefani, O., & Patel, H. (2006). Extending the desktop workplace by a portable virtual reality system: International Journal of Human-Computer Studies Vol 64(3) Mar 2006, 170-181. *Hori, K. (1997). Concept space connected to knowledge processing for supporting creative design: Knowledge-Based Systems Vol 10(1) Jun 1997, 29-35. *Hori, K. (1997). Preface: Information technology support for creativity: Knowledge-Based Systems Vol 10(1) Jun 1997, 1-2. *Hourcade, J. J., & Parette, P. (2001). Provising assistive technology information to professionals and families of children with MRDD: Interactive CD-ROM technology: Education & Training in Mental Retardation & Developmental Disabilities Vol 36(3) Sep 2001, 272-279. *Hovmark, S., Wollberg, E. F., & Nordqvist, S. (1996). A longitudinal study of health complaints in professional computer work: Effects of computer-aided design: International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction Vol 8(4) Oct-Dec 1996, 401-420. *Huart, J., Kolski, C., & Sagar, M. (2004). Evaluation of multimedia applications using inspection methods: The Cognitive Walkthrough case: Interacting with Computers Vol 16(2) Apr 2004, 183-215. *Humphrey, M. C. (1999). A graphical notation for the design of information visualizations: International Journal of Human-Computer Studies Vol 50(2) Feb 1999, 145-192. *Hunter, L. (2006). Critical form as everyday practice: An interview with Ellen Lupton: Information Design Journal Vol 14(2) 2006, 130-138. *Johnsen, J.-A. K. (2007). Constraints on message size in quasi-synchronous computer mediated communication: Effect on self-concept accessibility: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 23(5) Sep 2007, 2269-2284. *Kao, D., & Archer, N. P. (1997). Abstraction in conceptual model design: International Journal of Human-Computer Studies Vol 46(1) Jan 1997, 125-150. *Kato, N., & Kunifuji, S. (1997). Consensus-making support system for creative problem solving: Knowledge-Based Systems Vol 10(1) Jun 1997, 59-66. *Kawamura, Y. (2001). A study of the consumer cognitive model based on consumer public information--Toward the building of a product development scenario-planning system: Japanese Journal of Behaviormetrics Vol 28(2) Dec 2001, 69-83. *Kelkar, K., Khasawneh, M. T., Bowling, S. R., Gramopadhye, A. K., Melloy, B. J., & Grimes, L. (2005). The Added Usefulness of Process Measures Over Performance Measures in Interface Design: International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction Vol 18(1) 2005, 1-18. *Kim, D., Tyler, M. E., & Beebe, D. J. (2005). Development of a Tongue-Operated Switch Array as an Alternative Input Device: International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction Vol 18(1) 2005, 19-38. *Klein, M. R. (1999). SIMAR: A software environment to define and test strategic management knowledge bases: Decision Support Systems Vol 26(2) Aug 1999, 151-177. *Kleiner, B. M. (2002). Computer-aided macroergonomics for improved performance and safety: Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing Vol 12(3) Sum 2002, 307-319. *Kubota, A. (1997). Abduction Machine-1 as wooden furniture: Knowledge-Based Systems Vol 10(1) Jun 1997, 15-20. *Kurtz, M. M., Seltzer, J. C., Shagan, D. S., Thime, W. R., & Wexler, B. E. (2007). Computer-assisted cognitive remediation in schizophrenia: What is the active ingredient? : Schizophrenia Research Vol 89(1-3) Jan 2007, 251-260. *Lamansky, C. E. (1998). The application of cognitive engineering methods to the design of a computer interface and online help. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering. *Landsberger, S. A. (2006). Efficacy of computer-assisted cognitive training in individuals with serious psychiatric disorders. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering. *Lee, Y., Baylor, A. L., & Nelson, D. W. (2005). Supporting Problem-Solving Performance Through the Construction of Knowledge Maps: Journal of Interactive Learning Research Vol 16(2) 2005, 117-131. *Lee, Y.-L., Hwang, S.-L., & Wang, E. M.-Y. (2005). Reducing cognitive workload of a computer-based procedure system: International Journal of Human-Computer Studies Vol 63(6) Dec 2005, 587-606. *Lester, J. C., Callaway, C. B., Gregoire, J. P., Stelling, G. D., Towns, S. G., & Zettlemoyer, L. S. (2001). Animated pedagogical agents in knowledge-based learning environments. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. *Levert, C., & Pierre, S. (2003). Designing Distributed Virtual Laboratories: Methodological and Telecommunications Aspects: International Journal on E-Learning Vol 2(3) Jul-Sep 2003, 18-28. *Levy, G., Goldstein, L., Barenboim, E., & Bar-Dayan, Y. (2007). Effect of a computerized online grading system on patient satisfaction in a military primary health care setting: Military Medicine Vol 172(4) Apr 2007, 431-435. *Liao, S. Y., Wang, H. Q., & Liao, L. J. (2002). An extended formalism to constraint logic programming for decision analysis: Knowledge-Based Systems Vol 15(3) Mar 2002, 189-202. *Lindgaard, G., Dillon, R., Trbovich, P., White, R., Fernandes, G., Lundahl, S., et al. (2006). User Needs Analysis and requirements engineering: Theory and practice: Interacting with Computers Vol 18(1) Jan 2006, 47-70. *Liu, L., & Johnson, D. L. (2004). Web-Based Resources and Applications: Quality and Influence. New York, NY: Haworth Press. *Liu, M., & Hsiao, Y.-P. (2002). Middle school students as multimedia designers: A project-based learning approach: Journal of Interactive Learning Research Vol 13(4) 2002, 311-337. *Liu, M., & Rutledge, K. (1997). The effect of a "learner as multimedia designer" environment on at-risk high school students' motivation and learning of design knowledge: Journal of Educational Computing Research Vol 16(2) 1997, 145-177. *Logan, C. D. (2006). Circles of practice: Educational and professional graphic design: Journal of Workplace Learning Vol 18(6) 2006, 331-343. *Lowe, R., & Pramono, H. (2006). Using graphics to support comprehension of dynamic information in texts: Information Design Journal Vol 14(1) 2006, 22-34. *MacMillan, J., Tatum, B. C., Freeman, B., & Ropp, G. A. (1999). An analysis of the performance and usability of a software user coach for Navy manpower planning: International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction Vol 11(1) 1999, 47-69. *Mandinach, E. B. (1986). Computers and Statistical Reasoning: PsycCRITIQUES Vol 31 (9), Sep, 1986. *Maule, R. W. (2001). Framework for metacognitive mapping to design metadata for intelligent hypermedia presentations: Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia Vol 10(1) 2001, 27-45. *Meredith, J. W., & Kleiner, B. M. (2006). Empirical design of computer support and staffing in concurrent engineering: Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing Vol 16(2) Spr 2006, 177-193. *Milligan, C. D., Beauvoir, P., & Sharples, P. (2005). The reload learning design tools: Journal of Interactive Media in Education Vol 2005(1) 2005, No Pagination Specified. *Montesi, D. (1996). Heterogeneous knowledge representation: Integrating connectionist and symbolic computation: Knowledge-Based Systems Vol 9(8) Dec 1996, 501-507. *Munzer, S., Zimmer, H. D., Schwalm, M., Baus, J., & Aslan, I. (2006). Computer-assisted navigation and the acquisition of route and survey knowledge: Journal of Environmental Psychology Vol 26(4) Dec 2006, 300-308. *Nakakoji, K. (2005). Special Issue on "Computational Approaches for Early Stages of Design." Knowledge-Based Systems Vol 18(8) Dec 2005, 381-382. *Neef, N. A., & Lutz, M. N. (2001). Assessment of variables affecting choice and application to classroom interventions: School Psychology Quarterly Vol 16(3) Fal 2001, 239-252. *Nelson, A. C., & Teng, J. T. C. (2000). Do systems development methodologies and CASE tools decrease stress among systems analysts? : Behaviour & Information Technology Vol 19(4) Jul-Aug 2000, 307-313. *Newman, M. W., Lin, J., Hong, J. I., & Landay, J. A. (2003). DENIM: An Informal Web Site Design Tool Inspired by Observations of Practice: Human-Computer Interaction Vol 18(3) 2003, 259-324. *Nisan, N., & Ronen, A. (2001). Algorithmic Mechanism Design: Games and Economic Behavior Vol 35(1-2) Apr 2001, 166-196. *No authorship, i. (2006). Conference Announcement and Call for Papers: Composition & Computer-assisted Music-making: Psychology of Music Vol 34(4) Oct 2006, No Pagination Specified. *Ohiwa, H., Takeda, N., Kawai, K., & Shiomi, A. (1997). KJ editor: A card-handling tool for creative work support: Knowledge-Based Systems Vol 10(1) Jun 1997, 43-50. *Olsson, E. (2004). What active users and designers contribute in the design process: Interacting with Computers Vol 16(2) Apr 2004, 377-401. *Orzechowski, M. A., & de Vries, B. (2007). Eliciting user preferences through a guided design personalization process: Knowledge-Based Systems Vol 20(3) Apr 2007, 283-290. *Oser, R. L., Gualtieri, J. W., Cannon-Bowers, J. A., & Salas, E. (1999). Training team problem solving skills: An event-based approach: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 15(3-4) May-Jul 1999, 441-462. *Park, J.-H., & Storch, R. L. (2002). Overview of ship-design expert systems: Expert Systems: International Journal of Knowledge Engineering and Neural Networks Vol 19(3) Jul 2002, 136-141. *Parker, A. M. (2002). An individual differences measure of decision-making competence. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering. *Pedersen, J., Buur, J., & Djajadiningrat, T. (2003). Field design sessions: Augmenting whose reality? : International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction Vol 16(3) 2003, 461-476. *Pinkney, S., & Fernie, G. (2001). Product Development: Using a 3D Computer Model to Optimize the Stability of the Rocket-super( TM ) Powered Wheelchair: Assistive Technology Vol 13(1) 2001, 46-58. *Prasad, M. V. N., & Lesser, V. R. (1998). Learning organizational roles for negotiated search in a multiagent system: International Journal of Human-Computer Studies Vol 48(1) Jan 1998, 51-67. *Raisamo, R., Patomaki, S., Hasu, M., & Pasto, V. (2007). Design and evaluation of a tactile memory game for visually impaired children: Interacting with Computers Vol 19(2) Mar 2007, 196-205. *Rau, P.-L. P. (2005). Review of The craft of information visualization: Readings and reflections: International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction Vol 18(1) 2005, 129-130. *Renkema, J. (2006). Editorial: Information Design Journal Vol 14(1) 2006, 1-3. *Richards, C. (2006). Drawing out information - lines of communication in technical illustration: Information Design Journal Vol 14(2) 2006, 93-107. *Sachse, P., Leinert, S., & Hacker, W. (2001). Designing with computer and sketches: Swiss Journal of Psychology/Schweizerische Zeitschrift fur Psychologie/Revue Suisse de Psychologie Vol 60(2) Jun 2001, 65-72. *Salmeron, L., Kintsch, W., & Canas, J. J. (2006). Coherence or interest as basis for improving hypertext comprehension: Information Design Journal Vol 14(1) 2006, 45-55. *Sanchez-Bruno, A., San Luis, C., Sanchez-Perez, J., Borges, A., & Caballero, F. (1992). PC hardware and software designed for stimulus presentation: Psicothema Vol 4(2) Oct 1992, 583-589. *Savage, D. M. (2007). The advantages and disadvantages of three-dimensional maps for focused and integrative map analysis performance by novice and experienced users. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences. *Savidis, A., & Stephanidis, C. (2004). Unified user interface design: Designing universally accessible interactions: Interacting with Computers Vol 16(2) Apr 2004, 243-270. *Schacter, J., & Fagnano, C. (1999). Does computer technology improve student learning and achievement? How, when, and under what conditions? : Journal of Educational Computing Research Vol 20(4) 1999, 329-343. *Schrader, L., & Hammerschmidt, K. (1997). Computer-aided analysis of acoustic parameters in animal vocalisations: A multi-parametric approach: Bioacoustics Vol 7(4) 1997, 247-265. *Schroeder, M. R. (1999). Concert halls: From magic to number theory. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. *Schulze, H., Brau, H., Haasis, S., Weyrich, M., & Rhatje, T. (2005). Human-centered design of engineering applications: Success factors from a case study in the automotive industry: Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing Vol 15(4) Fal 2005, 421-443. *Schutze, M., & Ulbricht, S. (2006). Use of different media in the early stages of product development - A result- and process-oriented analysis: Zeitschrift fur Arbeits- und Organisationspsychologie Vol 50(2) 2006, 79-91. *Schuyten, G., & Dekeyser, H. M. (2007). Preference for textual information and acting on support devices in multiple representations in a computer based learning environment for: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 23(5) Sep 2007, 2285-2301. *Schwanke, R. W., & Hanson, S. J. (1994). Using neural networks to modularize software: Machine Learning Vol 15(1-3) Apr-Jun 1994, 137-168. *Shackelford, J., Thompson, D. S., & James, M. B. (1999). Teaching strategy and assignment design: Assessing the quality of information via the Web: Social Science Computer Review Vol 17(2) Sum 1999, 196-208. *Shamonsky, D. J. (2004). Tactile, spatial interfaces for computer-aided design: Superimposing physical media and computation. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences. *Shavalier, M. (2004). The effects of CAD-like software on the spatial ability of middle school students: Journal of Educational Computing Research Vol 31 2004, 37-49. *Shin, D. H., Dunston, P. S., & Wang, X. (2005). View changes in augmented reality computer-aided drawing: ACM Transactions on Applied Perception Vol 2(1) Jan 2005, 3-14. *Shirazi, M. A., & Soroor, J. (2007). An intelligent agent-based architecture for strategic information system applications: Knowledge-Based Systems Vol 20(8) Dec 2007, 726-735. *Siu, K. W. M. (2002). Reception of users: Respecting the perspectives of users for creative thinking in design: Korean Journal of Thinking & Problem Solving Vol 12(2) Oct 2002, 75-84. *Smyth, M. (2000). Design tools as agents of disclosure: Knowledge-Based Systems Vol 13(1) Feb 2000, 27-35. *Smyth, M., & Edmonds, E. (2000). Supporting design through the strategic use of shape grammars: Knowledge-Based Systems Vol 13(6) Nov 2000, 385-393. *Stock, O., & Strapparava, C. (2003). HAHAcronym: Humorous agents for humorous acronyms: Humor: International Journal of Humor Research Vol 16(3) 2003, 297-314. *Stretton, M. L., Johnston, J. H., & Cannon-Bowers, J. A. (1999). A conceptual architecture for embedded team training management. Us: Elsevier Science/JAI Press. *Sung, W.-T., & Ou, S. C. (2002). Web-based learning in the computer-aided design curriculum: Journal of Computer Assisted Learning Vol 18(2) Jun 2002, 175-187. *Svensson, A.-K. (2000). Computers in school: Socially isolating or a tool to promote collaboration: Journal of Educational Computing Research Vol 22(4) 2000, 437-453. *Takadama, K., Nakasuka, S., & Terano, T. (1998). Printed circuit board design via organizational-learning agents: Applied Intelligence Vol 9(1) Jul-Aug 1998, 25-37. *Tay, N. S. P., & Lusch, R. F. (2005). A preliminary test of Hunt's General Theory of Competition: Using artificial adaptive agents to study complex and ill-defined environments: Journal of Business Research Vol 58(9) Sep 2005, 1155-1168. *Terry, M., & Mynatt, E. D. (2005). Enhancing general-purpose tools with multi-state previewing capabilities: Knowledge-Based Systems Vol 18(8) Dec 2005, 415-425. *Thimbleby, H., & Addison, M. (1996). Intelligent adaptive assistance and its automatic generation: Interacting with Computers Vol 8(1) Mar 1996, 51-68. *Thompson, D. W. (2005). A computer-administered measure of sustained auditory selective attention in school-age children. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering. *Thurk, J., & Fine, G. A. (2003). The Problem of Tools: Technology and the Sharing of Knowledge: Acta Sociologica Vol 46(2) 2003, 107-117. *Tung, F.-W., & Deng, Y.-S. (2006). Designing social presence in e-learning environments: Testing the effect of interactivity on children: Interactive Learning Environments Vol 14(3) Dec 2006, 251-264. *Turner, P., & van de Walle, G. (2006). Familiarity as a basis for Universal Design: Gerontechnology Vol 5(3) Sep 2006, 150-159. *Tversky, B., Agrawala, M., Heiser, J., Lee, P., Hanrahan, P., Phan, D., et al. (2007). Cognitive Design Principles for Automated Generation of Visualizations. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers. *Uduma, L., & Morrison, G. R. (2007). How do instructional designers use automated instructional design tool? : Computers in Human Behavior Vol 23(1) Jan 2007, 536-553. *Van Gerven, P. W. M., Paas, F., & Tabbers, H. K. (2006). Cognitive aging and computer-based instructional design: Where do we go from here? : Educational Psychology Review Vol 18(2) Jun 2006, 141-157. *Vanderdonckt, J. (1999). Development milestones towards a tool for working with guidelines: Interacting with Computers Vol 12(2) Nov 1999, 81-118. *Varonen, H., Jousimaa, J., Helin-Salmivaara, A., & Kunnamo, I. (2005). Electronic primary care guidelines with links to Cochrane reviews--EBM Guidelines: Family Practice Vol 22(4) Aug 2005, 465-469. *Vogt, C., Mergl, C., & Bubb, H. (2005). Interior Layout Design of Passenger Vehicles With RAMSIS: Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing Vol 15(2) Spr 2005, 197-212. *Voss, K. S. (2005). Teaching by design: Using your computer to create materials for students with learning differences: (2005) Teaching by design: Using your computer to create materials for students with learning differences viii, Bethesda, MD, US: Woodbine House. *Wahlsten, D., Bishop, K. M., & Kruyer, A. (1997). Calibration of computer-monitored running wheels with adjustable drag: Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers Vol 29(2) May 1997, 280-285. *Watai, L. L. (2004). Designing effective electrical engineering laboratories: Application of challenge-based instruction, asynchronous learning methods, and computer-supported instrumentation. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering. *Wernet, S. P., Olliges, R. H., & Delicath, T. A. (2000). Postcourse evaluations of WebCT (web course tools) classes by social work students: Research on Social Work Practice Vol 10(4) Jul 2000, 487-504. *Wiebe, E. N. (1997). Recognition of local metric changes in 3-d computer models. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering. *Williams, K. E. (2005). Computer-Aided GOMS: A Description and Evaluation of a Tool That Integrates Existing Research for Modeling Human-Computer Interaction: International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction Vol 18(1) 2005, 39-58. *Wolach, A. H., & McHale, M. A. (2005). Line Spacing in Mondrian Paintings and Computer-Generated Modifications: Journal of General Psychology Vol 132(3) Jul 2005, 281-291. *Wong, P. T. P. (2003). Review of Designing Computer-Based Learning Materials: Academy of Management Learning & Education Vol 2(2) Jun 2003, 212-213. *Wong, S. T. C. (1997). Coping with conflict in cooperative knowledge-based systems: IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, & Cybernetics Vol 27(1) Jan 1997, 57-72. *Workman, J. E., & Zhang, L. (1999). Relationship of general and apparel spatial visualization ability: Clothing & Textiles Research Journal Vol 17(4) 1999, 169-175. *Xu, X. W., & Galloway, R. (2005). Using behavioral modeling technology to capture designer's intent: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 21(2) Mar 2005, 395-405. *Yang, C. C., & Naikan, V. N. A. (2003). Optimum tolerance design using constraint networks and relative sensitivity ratio algorithm: Applied Artificial Intelligence Vol 17(7) Aug 2003, 631-660. *Yang, S. C. (2001). Synergy of constructivism and hypermedia from three constructivist perspectives: Social, semiotic, and cognitive: Journal of Educational Computing Research Vol 24(4) 2001, 321-361. *Zha, X. F. (2002). A knowledge intensive mulit-agent framework for coopertive/collaborative design modeling and decision support of assemblies: Knowledge-Based Systems Vol 15(8) Nov 2002, 493-506. *Zhou, S., Chin, K.-S., & Yarlagadda, P. K. D. V. (2003). Internet-based intensive product design platform for product design: Knowledge-Based Systems Vol 16(1) Jan 2003, 7-15. External links * *Teachers TV exploration into the use of CAD/CAM in Schools *SolidWorks Lessons that can be used in highschools Category:Computer applications Category:Computer-aided design Category:Product lifecycle management